‘Al Qaeda leadership almost wiped out from Pakistan’: Report

[T90TankGuy]

yeah the present leadership is finished . but what about the emerging one?

 

[Last Hope]

"To nurture the future terrorist leaders of Afghanistan or a new insurgency in Kashmir?"

Sure. My speculation has its roots in Hussein Haqqani's book, Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military, where he recalls, often from his position as note-taker at meetings, the strategy of the P.A. in Kashmir: encourage an anti-India movement, then employ terrorists to knock off the leaders who want an independent Kashmir in favor of groups controlled by the ISI who favor union with Pakistan. (Location 5197, footnote 69 on my Kindle.)

He just presented the fact, but with twisted words.
We encourage them to raise their voices against illegal occupation by India and demands their rights, and fight the terrorists (according to your definition).

On the other hand, IF the ISI and Pak Army supports the FREEDOM FIGHTERS in Kashmir, you cannot label them as terrorists. From the same logic, those who supported the Libyan 'revolution' are all terrorists too.
Including your government, French government and British government.

 

[53fd]

There is no doubt that many Al-Qaeda operatives have been killed in the drone strikes. Many low-to-mid level fighters have been killed in the drone strikes. But the sucker punch was given by the Pakistan Army, when it's conducted its extensive operations in the FATA.

 

[53fd]

Yeah, and killing OBL was just a parade ???

OBL was just a figurehead, & was not directing the AQ.

 

[Developereo]

the “intense campaign” of unmanned drone strikes has successfully killed many al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan and “only a handful of key players” are left alive.

Two points:

- they are giving credit to the drone strikes, not Pakistan.

- how convenient that this "assessment" came just in time for NATO withdrawal and Pakistani route closure. It's NATO's way of putting a brave face on an unsustainable Afghan campaign without Pakistan's support, effectively saying "mission accomplished and time to go home".

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There is no doubt that many Al-Qaeda operatives have been killed in the drone strikes. Many low-to-mid level fighters have been killed in the drone strikes. But the sucker punch was given by the Pakistan Army, when it's conducted its extensive operations in the FATA.

As well as the neutralization of several senior and mid level AQ leaders such as KSM and Libbi ...

---------- Post added at 10:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 AM ----------

Yeah, and killing OBL was just a parade ???

In terms of operational impact, the killing of OBL had no impact.

The damage to AQ's operational cadres was done primarily by Pakistan, and the fact that Pakistan neutralized more AQ members than any other country has also been accepted by US officials, and without Pakistan's efforts and intelligence cooperation, the US would not have been able to get OBL in any case - so Pakistan's influence and role (indirect though it may be) in the neutralization of OBL is undeniable.

 

[foxbat]

OBL was just a figurehead, & was not directing the AQ.

In terms of operational impact, the killing of OBL had no impact.

Am sure this wouldnt have been the line towed by Pakistan had it been ISI who took out OBL..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Am sure this wouldnt have been the line towed by Pakistan had it been ISI who took out OBL..

I believe Musharraf and various other Pakistani military and civilian analysts/officials/commentators made the point that OBL was irrelevant multiple times in the past, before he was killed.

And inane rhetoric, such as that displayed in your post, is no substitute for refuting the argument made with facts and logic.

Would you care to argue why you think OBL was operationally relevant to AQ?

 

[VCheng]

.............

Would you care to argue why you think OBL was operationally relevant to AQ?

Not as operationally relevant as he once was, and still important as the inspirational figurehead, would perhaps be the better argument.

 

[foxbat]

I believe Musharraf and various other Pakistani military and civilian analysts/officials/commentators made the point that OBL was irrelevant multiple times in the past, before he was killed.

And inane rhetoric, such as that displayed in your post, is no substitute for refuting the argument made with facts and logic.

Would you care to argue why you think OBL was operationally relevant to AQ?

I never used the term operational.. You did..

Terrorism does not only survive thru operational functioning of terror modules or just thru bombings and killings. You need an icon that would hold the rag tag militia that comprises most terrorist outfits, a symbol who acts as a rally point for the normally scattered army who does not function purely on chain of command. Thats where OBL came in, even if I go with your logic of him beingoperationally irrelevant. Jehadis with a desire to blow themselves up are dime a dozen.. So are commanders who can command a platoon/company of such jehadis.. But you dont get symbols like OBL under every rock..No wonder that certain Pakistani officials knowing well that they were caught napping when OBL was taken out, still were willing to go out on a limb to claim ISI participation in the operation but ended up with the proverbial egg on the face...

About Musharraf and other Pakistanis saying this before he was killed, well that could be a number of things.. To begin with, ex Pakistani ISI chiefs allegations about Musharraf being a party to hiding OBL in Pakistan could be one reason.. He could simply be downplaying his crime.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Not as operationally relevant as he once was, and still important as the inspirational figurehead, would perhaps be the better argument.

How was an 'inspirational figure' even, given the extremely infrequent audio-tape rants he put out?

The 'inspiration' behind organizations such as AQ is US foreign policy.

 

[VCheng]

How was an 'inspirational figure' even, given the extremely infrequent audio-tape rants he put out?

The 'inspiration' behind organizations such as AQ is US foreign policy.

Well, let me rephrase my statement: OBL was seen as the main inspirational figure by the US, hence the decision to take him out.

What role US foreign policy plays into that, is a great discussion I admit.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I never used the term operational.. You did..

If he was not an operational threat, then he wasn't a threat, and therefore was largely irrelevant, as argued ...

Terrorism does not only survive thru operational functioning of terror modules or just thru bombings and killings. You need an icon that would hold the rag tag militia that comprises most terrorist outfits, a symbol who acts as a rally point for the normally scattered army who does not function purely on chain of command. Thats where OBL came in, even if I go with your logic of him beingoperationally irrelevant. Jehadis with a desire to blow themselves up are dime a dozen.. So are commanders who can command a platoon/company of such jehadis.. But you dont get symbols like OBL under every rock..No wonder that certain Pakistani officials knowing well that they were caught napping when OBL was taken out, still were willing to go out on a limb to claim ISI participation in the operation but ended up with the proverbial egg on the face...

Terrorism does indeed survive through the 'operational functioning of terror modules' - that is why the deaths of Nek Mohammed, Baitullah Mehsud and Abullah Mehsud had no impact on the continuing violence in Pakistan. It is operational leadership that made the TTP and AQ strong and effective groups, not some 'grandfather figure'.

Ideologically 'violent extremism' (terrorism if you will) needs a political goal and enemy to 'rally around' - for AQ and other groups like it, the ideological driving forces are US/Western foreign policies and military interventions, as well as domestic political, religious and cultural fault-lines in the regions in which they operate. The violence in Iraq after the US invasion did not come about because of OBL or some OBL sponsored campaign (Zarqawi in fact operated independently of AQ and AQ eventually decided to make him part of the organization), it came about because of the US military invasion and sectarian fault-lines in Iraq.

About Musharraf and other Pakistanis saying this before he was killed, well that could be a number of things.. To begin with, ex Pakistani ISI chiefs allegations about Musharraf being a party to hiding OBL in Pakistan could be one reason.. He could simply be downplaying his crime.

The ex-ISI chief's claims have been thoroughly debunked in the thread started on that topic - please read through it and respond there instead of regurgitating unsubstantiated allegations.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...claims-civilian-led-ib-musharraf-hid-obl.html

BTW, it was not just Musharraf and Pakistanis pointing out OBL was irrelevant, various Western commentators made the same argument.

And again, on what basis are you arguing that OBL had any relevance for AQ operations or ideology by the time he was killed? Can you point to any tangible situation or event that can illustrate this 'important ideological and/or operational impact' he continued to have on AQ?

---------- Post added at 10:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:53 AM ----------

Well, let me rephrase my statement: OBL was seen as the main inspirational figure by the US, hence the decision to take him out.

What role US foreign policy plays into that, is a great discussion I admit.

While I agree with your point about the views of the US re. OBL, that does not change the fact that in reality OBL had little to no ideological or operational influence on AQ or organizations like it by the time he was killed, and had not had any influence for several years leading up to his death.

 

[VCheng]

.............
While I agree with your point about the views of the US re. OBL, that does not change the fact that in reality OBL had little to no ideological or operational influence on AQ or organizations like it by the time he was killed, and had not had any influence for several years leading up to his death.

Perhaps his increasing ineffectiveness towards the end can be regarded as one measure of the success of the WoT, and not because of OBL's change of heart? If so, then his legitimacy as a valid target remained intact till he was dispatched.

 

[Rafi]

The same reason that the US military industrial complex needs an enemy to justify the massive defense budget that has made it fight two wars in Asia - and looking at defeat in both wars.

---------- Post added at 09:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:03 PM ----------

The extremist ideology professed by OBL and his followers - makes his death more preferable as a "martyr" than his eventual natural death.